21 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
81 people marked this as a favorite.

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

This is a culmination of every rules ambiguity proposed in the Paizo Blog: Let's Be Clear discussion thread. I figured after 8 pages of comments it was finally time to organize the community's thoughts into one location. I tried including as many relevant links as possible. If you still have additional rules that you think could benefit from a Campaign Clarifications document, feel free to post them below.

30) Clarifications regarding Spring Loaded Wrist Sheathes -
a) Is the list given (that doesn't include scrolls) exhaustive?
b) If not, would removing the scroll from a Spring-Loaded Wrist Sheath destroy the scroll, making it useless anyway?
c) If not, would removing the scroll from a Spring-Loaded Wrist Sheath (a swift action) provoke an AoO?
d) Here's a really good discussion on the matter.

33) Clarifications regarding Psychic Casters -
a) How do psychic casters regain their spells? (Arcane require 8 hours rest, Divine get spells back at a certain time of day regardless of rest.)
b) Are Psychic casters subject to the "recent casting limit" restriction?
c) If I select a Psychic spell for Magical Lineage or Wayang Spellhunter, and I undercast that spell (for instance Mind Thrust III to Mind Thrust I), does the Trait work for the undercast version?
d) Psychic bloodline Sorcerers cast psychic spells instead of arcane spells. Is it still considered an arcane spellcasting class?
e) When does a Medium pick up their legendary spirit?

If you still have additional rules that you think could benefit from a Campaign Clarifications document, feel free to post them below.

Another suggestion:

A clarification on starting languages for Kitsune and other non-human Tian characters: do they get both Common & Tien for free? Additional confusion for Kitsune comes from the language lists being different in the Dragon Empire Primer and the Advanced Race Guide
this thread and this thread have some earlier comments

I would like to know about Gloom Chymist. Normal Alchemist get brew potion, but in PFS they get extra bombs.
A gloom does not qualify as a bomb for the purposes of feats or discoveries.
So in they get a feat that they can't get and/or does nothing.

Been trying to get a couple of official FAQ responses for ages, but perhaps PFS clarifications are good enough for now:

1) Given that the White Haired Witch archetype is more or less the Prehensile Hair hex made into an entire class, is it really supposed to only use Intelligence for 'hair' damage rolls but not attack rolls, when the original hex uses Intelligence for both attack and damage? Or was it simply an oversight in the writing?

2) A few classes like the Brawler and Warpriest have the ability to substitute the base damage dice of weapons with dice specified by that class and class level. If you have an effect that further alters the size category or the weapon in question, does the size increase adjustment get applied to the original damage dice, the substituted damage dice, both, or neither?

We had a big argument about the white-haired witch at a recent convention, so if the document could also specify that the Intelligence modifier to damage replaces Strength rather than stacking with it, that would be awesome.

I was under the impression the campaign clarifications doc was to be updated alongside the additional resources doc. While obviously I didn't expect everything on this list to be included, I was expecting an update. Is this document going to have a permanent home so that new people will be able to find it without having to peruse old blog entries?

Request - Clarifications on the Inner Sea Pirate prestige class from the "Pirates of the Inner Sea" Player Companion.

Here is the relevant thread detailing that the PrC is missing its HD. Also missing is a clarification on whether page 24 or 25 in Pirates of the Inner Sea is correct as to when Pirate Tricks are obtained.

Pyromaniac adds to spells with the fire descriptor; powers of the Fire domain, fire elemental bloodline, or flame mystery; and alchemist bombs. The kinny's ability is none of the above.

That always struck me as a flaw in Pathfinder content's independent updates. Sure, it would make sense for a Lava Gnome to get the Pyromaniac bonus to the Volcano Mystery (among others), but it isn't spelled out in the ability.

The game would benefit from categorization. If the Pyromaniac ability applied its benefit to <fire magic> then we could easily determine intent if a new ability belonged to the <fire magic> group.

Of course, this is me asking for the moon, but this seems like a good thread for lunar requests.

Argument for secondary: The animal companion horse technically doesn't have the docile ability. It has hooves. Hooves are listed as a secondary attack on the natural attacks chart in the bestiary, so they're secondary.

Argument For primary The bestiary and animal companions were being put together at the same time.

Kind of coincidental that the horse companion gets the ability "combat trained" to make the hooves primary. (and likely won't serve any other purpose since most horses are combat trained from level 1)

A combat horse bought off the lot shouldn't have better hoof attacks than an animal companion

Hooves are listed as a secondary attack on the natural attacks chart in the bestiary, so they're secondary.

They're also listed as secondary for the horse animal companion, which if it doesn't get Docile, doesn't as written have any game ability that changes this. I agree they should and were intended to become primary.

Flutter wrote:

Kind of coincidental that the horse companion gets the ability "combat trained" to make the hooves primary. (and likely won't serve any other purpose since most horses are combat trained from level 1)

A combat horse bought off the lot shouldn't have better hoof attacks than an animal companion

Well, the class abilities that give a horse combat training from level 1 didn't exist when the CRB was written. For a druid it's a sensible but not guaranteed choice to train the horse's standard tricks as combat training.

A good Clarification:
The Sohei archetype for Monk (ultimate combat): what are the limits to the statement, "A sohei may select Mounted Combat feats as bonus feats."?
Does the archetype have a progressing list as does the base monk?

Should pterosaurs be counted as dinosaurs for abilities and powers that specify dinosaurs? I know that species-wise, they're a seperate evolutionary branch, but theme-wise grouping them together makes sense from a game perspective.

More of a request than clarifications, can dire animals be added to the "megafauna" classification?

This is more a personal thing - can we have the prices on the lances in Knights of the Inner Sea looked at? The War Lance and the Knight-Captain's Lances had their prices switched, which makes the Knight-Captain's Lance severely overpriced and the War Lance severely underpriced (and why it was made not legal for play, from my understanding.

Knights of the Inner Sea wrote:

War Lance

Aura moderate abjuration CL 8th
Slot none; Price 10,310 gp; Weight 10 lbs.
Description
Shorter and thicker than most lances, this +3 lance has a full-sized shield worked into the vamplate, though it is too heavy to count as a shield for shield bash and similar maneuvers, and does not automatically grant the wielder a shield bonus to AC. However, a war lance grants the wielder and her steed a +2 shield bonus to AC when the wielder is mounted.
Construction
Requirements Craft Magic Arms and Armor, shield; Price 5,310 gp

Knights of the Inner Sea wrote:

Knight-Captain's Lance

Aura moderate evocation CL 6th
Slot none; Price 22,710 gp; Weight 13 lbs.
Description
This ornate +2 lance changes in color and style to match the armor of the wielder. A bright pennon flies from the end of the lance, mounted just behind the lance’s point, and if the wielder has personal heraldry, the pennon displays that heraldry. This pennon can serve as a cavalier’s banner. The weapon counts as alchemical silver for purposes of penetrating DR. Three times per day, when the wielder successfully damages a target with the knight-captain’s lance, as a swift action she may grant all allies within 60 feet a +2 morale bonus on the next attack roll they make against the same target. The bonus lasts for 1 round.
Construction
Requirements Craft Magic Arms and Armor, divine favor; Price 11,510 gp

One more Dinosaur request: Can we have Megaraptors added as legal for characters that can take dinosaur animal companions/wild shape/polymorph forms? They are listed in the Bestiary as merely being size Large versions of the Deinonychus, with more hit dice.

Unfortunately since they already have a semi-write-up in the Bestiary, I don't see them getting a seperate entry in future books. They have appeared in PFS scenarios, albeit undead versions both times.

When can you use immediate actions?
- Can you use emergency force sphere to block an incoming fireball?
- Can you use windy escape to negate a confirmed crit/before a crit threat is confirmed to make sure it is not confirmed?

Personally, I love immediate actions, since it makes combat more dynamic. I wish PFS enemies would use them more often too. A fireball splashing against a hastily conjured wall of force or a Sylph turning himself (even more) gaseous to protect his vital organs when he realises an instant before that scythe is going to puncture his lung - any good cinematic battle has at least a few last-second counters by both the hero and the villain.

But others have raised the question, so I thought some clarification would help.

In the newly appproved Magic Tactics Toolbox player companion, the Questioner Investigator archetype exchanges alchemy (which normally doesn't risk arcane spell failure) for bard spellcasting. Is the questioner supposed to ignore arcane spell failure chance due to light armor, just like a bard?

So Magic Tactics Toolbox was discussed in the new edition of the Clarifications, but this wasn't.

Can we know if that was an intentional decision not to change it, or just an oversight? I'm firmly convinced that the Questioner's problem is an accident during writing, but it does rather undermine the archetype.

Spoiler:

Normally investigators have Alchemy and Light Armor Proficiency. Arcane Spell Failure is not an issue when using extracts.

The Questioner trades Alchemy for bardic spellcasting. Bards have a line in their armor proficiencies saying they don't get ASF in Light Armor. That line doesn't by RAW carry over to the Questioner.

I believe it should and that this is just an oversight;

1) Both classes have light armor proficiency and can normally cast in it.

2) The Questioner keeps light armor proficiency. This would make it the only example I know of a class that can't cast well in its regular armor.

3) The Questioner remains melee-focused (keeps Studied Combat, which only works in melee unless you have a long feat chain). The archetype isn't obviously meant to no longer fight.

4) The Questioner's new spell list no longer has Shield, and doesn't have Mage Armor. Again, I can't name any class that's got ASF and not got Mage Armor.

What I propose:

Quote:

Questioner: Questioner Investigators can cast spells in light armor without arcane spell failure chance. Unlike bards, they do not ignore spell failure chance for shields. Because investigators do not get shield proficiency.

A recurring question about the Harm spell. Does the clause that it cannot reduce HP below one apply on a successful save only, or regardless of saving throw? The spell's wording can be read either way.

A recurring question about the Harm spell. Does the clause that it cannot reduce HP below one apply on a successful save only, or regardless of saving throw? The spell's wording can be read either way.

Huh?

Harm wrote:

Harm charges a subject with negative energy that deals 10 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 150 points at 15th level). If the creature successfully saves, harm deals half this amount. Harm cannot reduce the target's hit points to less than 1.

I don't see any ambiguity. Harm cannot reduce the target's hit points to less than 1. Ever.

A recurring question about the Harm spell. Does the clause that it cannot reduce HP below one apply on a successful save only, or regardless of saving throw? The spell's wording can be read either way.

Huh?

Harm wrote:

Harm charges a subject with negative energy that deals 10 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 150 points at 15th level). If the creature successfully saves, harm deals half this amount. Harm cannot reduce the target's hit points to less than 1.

I don't see any ambiguity. Harm cannot reduce the target's hit points to less than 1. Ever.

What?!?

*checks sources, Pathfinder and 3.5*

WOW, never knew that, we've been murderizing stuff for years with that spell XD

And I agree with Lau, with the way the last sentence is structured there's no ambiguity.

I don't see any ambiguity. Harm cannot reduce the target's hit points to less than 1. Ever.

In 3.5 it could.

Harm wrote:

Harm charges a subject with negative energy that deals 10 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 150 points at 15th level). If the creature successfully saves, harm deals half this amount, but it cannot reduce the target’s hit points to less than 1.

PF specifically changed that so that Harm could not outright kill, and if you are familiar with older editions, it's a very easy thing to miss.

PF Harm wrote:

Harm charges a subject with negative energy that deals 10 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 150 points at 15th level). If the creature successfully saves, harm deals half this amount. Harm cannot reduce the target's hit points to less than 1.

It could be useful to add a clarification on Wild Shields and giving their shield bonus while wildshaped to the clarification doc.

You are assuming that it was supposed to, which might not be the case. Shields don't have a long period to remove or equip like armor does, and a shield could be much more easily used as a weapon, too, and despite what BNW says one down, there is no ambiguity as to if you can apply the magical property to a shield, just if it does what you want it to, which is different than what the property actually says.

I could see it very easily allowing Armor, and only Armor bonuses to AC to remain while Wild Shaped, even if it's a property you put on your shield.